" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.463/PUN/2025 Gautam Labdhi Medical and Research Charitable Trust, 101 Shri Ramnagar Society, S. No. 52, Kharadi, Pune-411014 PAN : AAETG3129Q Vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sharad Vaze Department by : Shri Vishwas S. Mundhe Date of hearing : 10-06-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28-07-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.09.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“CIT(E)”] whereby he rejected the application of the assessee filed before him on 16.03.2023 in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). 2. The assessee has filed this appeal with a delay. The managing trustee of assessee trust has filed a sworn affidavit for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. On perusal of the same, we are satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal is not intentional or deliberate but has occurred for the reasons mentioned in the affidavit. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that the delay is attributable to the sufficient cause. We, therefore, in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339, condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.463/PUN/2025 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The assessee prays to condone the delay of 455 days in filing the present appeal for the reasons beyond its control. The assessee begs to submit an affidavit at the time of hearing. 2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Pune, is not justified in rejecting the registration on the basis of non-submission of documents by the assessee, as the assessee was not aware of the requirements. The application for registration u/s 12AA be restored by setting aside his order dt 01/09/2023. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on receipt of the assessee’s application filed in Form No. 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act along with annexures thereto, with a view to verify the genuineness of the activities of the assessee and compliance to requirements of any other law for the time being in force, the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice on 12.07.2023 through ITBA portal which was duly served on the assessee requesting the assessee to upload certain information/clarification such as date of commencement of activity, date of expiry of provisional registration, details of any other law applicable for achievement of objectives and the proof of compliance of said law, proof of identity of main trustees/managing trustees/directors/trustees/secretary, list of donors, note on activities carried out in the last three years/inception etc. under the provisions of section 12AB of the Act. The compliance was sought by 24.07.2023. As the assessee did not responded, another opportunity was given to the assessee vide notice dated 28.07.2023 seeking compliance by 07.08.2023. The assessee responded and on verification of the details/documents filed by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(E) noticed various discrepancies which were communicated to the assessee vide issue of another notice dated 14.08.2023 duly served upon the assessee via e-portal/email seeking compliance by 18.08.2023. The said discrepancies pointed out by the Ld. CIT(E) are reproduced below : \"(i) The compliance to the initial notice is not complete. A point wise reply to the notice has not be furnished. More specifically, the date of commencement of activities, the details of religious objectives, details of business undertaking, if any etc. are not furnished. Thus, you have failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (ii) Certificate of registration issued by the Charity Commissioner has not been furnished by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.463/PUN/2025 (iii) No proof of activities carried out has been furnished. The images furnished do not show the 'actual activities carried out by the assessee. Details such as names of beneficiaries, services rendered to them by the assessee, date, etc has not been furnished. As such, charitable nature of the assessee society has remained unproved. (iv) Tentative Bal sheet/I&E account of FY 2022-23 and annexures are not furnished.” 4.1 As the assessee failed to submit any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee has nothing to say in the matter. Having been unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust, the Ld. CIT(E) proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application of the assessee and also cancelling the provisional registration granted earlier to the assessee on 03.03.2023. 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that there was no intentional non-compliance to last notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) seeking certain clarification/ documents as per the discrepancies pointed out by him. The assessee could not furnish its response due to certain unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. The managing trustee of the assessee trust was under tremendous mental pressure/tension because of his sister's illness and therefore could not visit the IT Portal frequently. The Ld. AR submitted that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to submit all the requisite details/documentary evidence before the Ld. CIT(E) in support of its application and respond to the discrepancies noticed by the Ld. CIT(E) to his satisfaction. Relying on the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Datar Kulmandal…… ITA, dated , he prayed that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh on merits after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. The Ld. DR had no objection the above request of the Ld. AR. 8. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the records. It is an admitted fact that due to the non-compliance to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(E) asking for certain clarification/documentary evidence as per the discrepancy noted by him, he rejected the assessee’s application for Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.463/PUN/2025 grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act and also cancelled the provisional registration granted earlier. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing all the relevant supporting details/documents/ evidence before the Ld. CIT(E). Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the assessee’s case enumerated above, we are of the view that it would be judicially expedient and in the interest of justice and fair play, if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) to consider the assessee’s application for registration afresh and decide the same on merits, in accordance with fact and law after allowing one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee and present its case. Needless to say, the assessee shall provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant details/documentary evidence as may be required/called upon on the appointed date without seeking adjournment under any pretext unless for required for sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(E) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We order accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (R.K. Panda) (Astha Chandra) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 28th July, 2025. रदि आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, िररष्ठ दनजी सदचि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "